Britain had been planning a war against Syria some two years sordid before to the unrest broke out in the Arab country

Hmm...back to WW1:

Sir Edward and his wife spent Christmas 1905 with Lord Rosebery. A few days later, on 29th December, Grey was made aware by fellow Coefficients member Col. Repington of The Times – who had helped to arrange them – that secret talks had started between British and French staff officers with a view to coordinating operations against Germany in the event of war in northern France and Belgium. Let us remember that this was 1905, not 1914 !

On the night of 30-31st of July, feeling entrapped by a seemingly inevitable march of events, Kaiser Wilhelm mused to himself doomily:

Frivolity and weakness are going to plunge the world into the most frightful war of which the ultimate object is the overthrow of Germany. For I no longer have any doubt that England, Russia and France have agreed among themselves – knowing that our treaty obligations compel us to support Austria – to use the Austro-Serb conflict as a pretext for waging a war of annihilation against us... In this way the stupidity and clumsiness of our ally [Austria] is turned into a noose. So the celebrated encirclement of Germany has finally become an accepted fact... The net has suddenly been closed over our heads, and the purely anti-German policy which England has been scornfully pursuing all over the world has won the most spectacular victory which we have proved ourselves powerless to prevent while they, having got us despite our struggles all alone into the net through our loyalty to Austria, proceed to throttle our political and economic existence. A magnificent achievement, which even those for whom it means disaster are bound to admire.

There may be men here in Europe who, since they all like to think short-sightedly nowadays, look upon the outbreak of the present war as being connected with the murder of the Archduke Franz Ferdinand, (Note 92) Heir Apparent to the Throne. I do not say that this is untrue or that there is no truth in it, but on the basis of this event they can explain certain occurrences that they trace back to this murder of July 1914. But there may also be other persons who stress that, in a Western newspaper of January 1913, the statement appeared that the Archduke Franz Ferdinand was to be murdered in the near future for the well-being of European humanity. What I mean to say is that we may go back as far as the actual murder, but we may also go back to the notice of it that appeared in a Western newspaper in January 1913. (Note 93)

It is also possible to go back to the murder of Jaures on the last evening before the war began — probably never entirely explained, as I recently suggested. But it is equally possible to go back to the same newspaper to which I just referred, which carried the statement in 1913 saying that if conditions in Europe should lead to war, Jaures would be the first to meet his death — You may consult a certain occult almanac (Note 94) that was sold for forty francs and find in the issue for 1913, which was printed, of course, in 1912, the statement that he who was expected to be the ruler in Austria would not be the ruler, but rather a younger man, whom people wouldn't even now consider as the successor to the old Emperor Franz Josef. (Note 95) That was printed in a so-called occult almanac for 1913; printed, therefore, in the autumn of 1912. Moreover, in the same almanac for 1914, printed in 1913, the same remark was repeated (Note 96) because obviously the attempt on Emperor Franz Josef's life had miscarried in 1913.

When these things are seen more clearly, the connection will someday be discovered that exists between what actually happens externally and what is cooked up by hidden, dark sources. Many will recognize the threads that lead from public life into this or that brotherhood, and how stupid it is for other brotherhoods continually to declare that silence should be maintained regarding certain mystery truths. Such people may be as innocent as children, in spite of the fact that they may be old members of this or that brotherhood of Freemasons which lay claim to secret sources. Nevertheless, they further intensify the obscurity and darkness that is already present among human beings.

Footnotes:

93. The newspaper referred to was Paris-Midi. Cf. the speeches by Jean Jaures published by Victor Schiff (Berlin, 1919).

95. Cf. “L'assassin,“ in Almanach de Mme de Thebes 1913 (Paris, 1912): “The one who is supposed to rule Austria (Franz Ferdinand) is not going to rule but rather a young man who at this time is not intended to be the ruler (Karl I).“

96. See “Més predications de l'an passé,“ Almanach de Mme de Thebes 1914 (Paris, 1913): “The tragic event that I predicted for the Austrian imperial family has not yet occurred, but it will definitely take place before the first half of the year has elapsed.“

Rudolf Steiner spoke about the 'secret brotherhoods of the West' and their behind-the-curtains manipulation of spiritual, cultural, and political developments. He claimed to be able to prove that the map of Europe that was drawn in 1918, had existed in England in the 1890's, and that the same secret brotherhoods had engineered the Bolshevik revolution in Russia as a 'social experiment'.

From the Madame Thebes article above:

"Germany. she adds, is condemned to exist no longer, at least as she now is"

Now the map that was printed in Truth magazine, in 1890. Its editor was
Henry Labouchère who was supposedly a Freemason.

Note the German Republics_________________"Soon after the year 2000 has been written, a law will go forth from America whose purpose will be to suppress all individual thinking. This will not be the wording of the law, but it will be the intent" Rudolf Steiner: Gegenwärtiges und Vergangenes in Menschengeiste (The Present and the Past in the Human Spirit)

Rudolf Steiner told the anthroposophists of a map of Europe that had been
drawn by the secret societies already in the ’Eighties of the 19th century.

With the aid of this map the members of the societies were trained for special tasks – preparation of the First World War. This map also foresaw the division of Austria- Hungary, the formation of a Slavic confederation in the Balkans, the shifting of the eastern border of France etc. Rudolf Steiner closes his account with the words: compare this map with what is already contained in the note from the Entente to Wilson. It is what was then regarded (and intended for implementation) as the ideal way of dividing up Europe (Jan. 14, 1917, GA 174).

We also have to take into account – says Rudolf Steiner – that this map, i.e. this division of European affairs, has the tendency to serve the formation of the commercial-universal monarchy … to found commercial world domination(Jan. 15, 1917, GA 174).

For this reason we must, if we speak of those guilty of the First World War, pay the greatest attention to the indicators of economic development. At the beginning of the century in Russia with its inexhaustible natural resources, an industrial development was under way, that in time would certainly have made it economically the most powerful country in the world.

It was clear that even world wars would not be able to arrest this process. The only possible alternative was – to turn Russia from within into a desert.

Rudolf Steiner explains that in Germany … export [from Jan. to June 1914] was to the value of 1,045,000,000 Pounds, while that of Britain was 1,075,000,000 Pounds.

If the world war had not taken place … German export might have been
greater than the British. This was not to be allowed! (Dec. 4, 1916, GA 173).

In addition, behind what happened in Austria in July/August 1914 … there indeed stood financial powers whose origins are possibly not in Austria itself, but for which Austria was an instrument for the achievement of certain things.

It was not especially difficult to realize them when one was dealing with the ruling ‘Nibelungen’. But by and large there stood behind the totality of outer and inner factors that led to the unleashing of the world war the expansion of the imperialism of the English-speaking realms … , that which was able to lead, from every corner, to reasons for declaring war if one … so wished, that is the transformation of the so liberal politics, the politics that had become so liberal in the middle of the 19th century, into the English imperialism of the 20th century
(Nov. 9, 1918, GA 185a).

There is a lecture by Rudolf Steiner in which he speaks directly about the Second World War, or – more precisely – about the Second World War in its inseparable connection to the Third. Our research merely confirms the correctness and depth of his foresight, the view of the world founded this time not on supersensible experience, but on an analysis of the political, cultural and spiritual tendencies in the world during the first third of our century.

He says: There are a number of people already – and this number will quickly grow –, who grasp that it is entirely impossible to go through anything else but a revolution if one continues to work in the old sense. Just as in the old sense people were told: we have to wage a war in order to quell the revolution in our own country, so nothing other is meant than that work has to be done, particularly amongst those people of the West who are versed in the old way of thinking, to prepare the ground for the Second World War.

There is no other way than, in order to overcome inner Bolshevism, to work in the West towards the Second World War. You can hear the cry from the lower strata of society: World-revolution!
This idea of world-revolution can only be shrouded in a fog through the
unleashing of this Second World War catastrophe. There cannot be any other way (Jan. 2, 1921, GA 338)

_________________"Soon after the year 2000 has been written, a law will go forth from America whose purpose will be to suppress all individual thinking. This will not be the wording of the law, but it will be the intent" Rudolf Steiner: Gegenwärtiges und Vergangenes in Menschengeiste (The Present and the Past in the Human Spirit)

Last edited by Husq on Fri Nov 08, 2013 7:47 pm; edited 1 time in total

It is an astonishing fact that there is one (only one) person – not in the West, not even in Middle Europe, but in Russia – who exposed the lie of the Second World War. We refer to Viktor Suvorov and his book The Icebreaker.

Destiny prepares strange paths indeed for the people of this century. We can say that this man walked by the throne of Satan himself and yet was able to reach the light of day through his own strength. As an outstanding military specialist and an unusually sharp-minded analyst he proved irrefutably that the Germans started a preventive war against the USSR.

We will not go into details of the book here, as it needs to be read in its entirety. Discussion is impossible with anyone who does not do this (it is published in various languages)

Many in Russia as well as in Germany will not read this book, for the reason given above: It triggers off irregular heartbeats in the interplay of nervous system and blood circulation.

A person who has adopted the English-Soviet-American version of
the cause of the War risks suffering a collapse after reading this book.
Suvorov’s position is unshakeable in that he refers to sources accessible to the public, and to the testimony of Soviet generals. For example, at the end of the book he quotes Admiral Kuznetsov, a witness of the highest rank:

J. V. Stalin made preparations for a war – extensive and all-round preparations – … Hitler thwarted his plans. (This is one eyewitness testimony out of hundreds!)

On the other hand, Suvorov writes, General Field Marshall W. Keitel said: … aggression was prepared by the Soviet Union. Germany merely protected herself from the unavoidable aggression by carrying out the preventive strike.

Both say the same thing!

In this connection Suvorov asks a question of tremendous importance, he addresses the conscience of his contemporaries, wherever in the world they maylive.

But to this day conscience has remained silent, thus bearing witness to the
stark and merciless character of the spirit of our times, the spirit of cowardice, betrayal and opportunism.

Suvorov writes: It is clear to me that the judges of the ‘International Tribunal’ in Nuremberg did not have the wish (or the professional
honesty) to find those truly responsible for the war.

But I cannot understand why the same ‘judges’ did not immediately re-assemble in Nuremberg after the revelations of Admiral Kuznetsov, in order to lift a part of the guilt from Keitel, Jodl, the German Wehrmacht, and from Germany as a whole?

My Lord Judges, would you please explain to us your strange attitude? The
accused of Nuremberg did not plead guilty to aggression against the USSR. The ‘offended’ side has admitted that no-one carried out an act of aggression against them, that on the contrary, the ‘offended’ party was preparing an attack.

How can it be, Lord Judges, that you were in such a hurry to hang Keitel
and Jodl but that you are now in no hurry to hang Kuznetsov, Zhukov, Molotov?

Why, Lord Judges, do you maintain your accusations against Germany, but hesitate to press charges against the USSR?

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Icebreaker-Who-Started-Second-World/dp/0241126 223_________________"Soon after the year 2000 has been written, a law will go forth from America whose purpose will be to suppress all individual thinking. This will not be the wording of the law, but it will be the intent" Rudolf Steiner: Gegenwärtiges und Vergangenes in Menschengeiste (The Present and the Past in the Human Spirit)

Last edited by Husq on Fri Nov 08, 2013 8:09 pm; edited 2 times in total

The Brotherhood of the Shadows - Subtitle: Hidden powers of opposition, and how they work

Today there is widespread scepticism towards what is communicated in the media, and many people try to look below the surface for more plausible-sounding information. Starting on this level, a determined quest for the truth can reach through various outer layers to the realm known as the "occult". In addition to the forces for good that are active in this realm, there are powers at work whose aim it is to create obstacles to human development.

We owe to Rudolf Steiner, who was able to carry out spiritual investigations in the sphere of the "occult", many insights, also into these forces of hindrance and their working through institutions and individuals in the political, economic and cultural spheres.

Pfeifer's book provides a wealth of well‐documented material on activities behind the scenes and introduces readers to a method called by Steiner "historical symptomatology", without which it is, so he said, impossible to penetrate behind the "fable convenue" of history and of events in modern times.

Who are, then, the “Brothers of the Shadows”? One could perhaps imagine
them as something akin to high priests of the powers of darkness, as people with occult capacities who stand in connection with anti-Christian super-earthly powers, retarded and retarding beings.

These beings are Angels that are called “evil” by us human beings, and work counter to the rightful course of the evolution of mankind. In the wider cosmic context they, too, have their justification and their working as so-called forces of opposition acquires a deeper meaning.

Nevertheless, we human beings are faced again and again with the decision, in whose spirit we think, feel and act.
The “Brothers of the Shadows” inspire long-term strategies, which are taken up all too willingly by certain circles who wish to implement them. They cause their marionettes to dance on all levels of politics, culture, economy and finance.

Elements that are employed to attract the outside world are an intellectual- materialistic mindset combined with a striving for power and money. Simple folk are distracted from these manoeuvres through being kept busy in the struggle for survival or, on the other hand, tranquillized with amusements.

But we would warn explicitly against oversimplification, apportionment of
blame, scapegoating and generalizations, according to which now the Jews, now the Illuminati, now the Freemasons are the ones responsible for all the bad in the world.

The truth is far more complex because these “streams” cited as
examples consist of manifold groups with different interests. Élitist circles
within these “streams” dominate, however, and claim to represent the whole.

We wish here to present, as far as possible without prejudice and with no claim to exhaustiveness, some facts and connections.
A power élite consists of people who play varied roles. They are in a position, thanks to shared access to various levels of power – e.g. sanctions – to force through decisions that are favourable to them and have far-reaching effects.

_________________"Soon after the year 2000 has been written, a law will go forth from America whose purpose will be to suppress all individual thinking. This will not be the wording of the law, but it will be the intent" Rudolf Steiner: Gegenwärtiges und Vergangenes in Menschengeiste (The Present and the Past in the Human Spirit)

Mr Paxman incensed No10 when he told BBC chat show host Graham Norton last week he was ‘troubled’ by Mr Cameron ‘talking about how millions of pounds were going to be spent marking this anniversary’ and the fact that he had ‘compared it with the celebrations for the Diamond Jubilee’.
Mr Paxman said: ‘Therefore people get the idea that somehow this is going to be celebrated. Well, only a complete idiot would celebrate such a calamity.
'Three quarters of a million men never came back to this country.
'Millions of men served. Millions of men were wounded mentally and physically. No one would celebrate that. It was just Cameron’s clumsy use of language.’

The battlefield hostilities may have officially terminated 96 years ago but the argument over the rights and wrongs of the First World War show little sign having been settled. Today, one of Britain’s most eminent historians hit back at what he described as an “ignorant attack” by Education Secretary Michael Gove on his analysis of the conflict.

Writing in the Daily Mail yesterday Mr Gove accused Professor Sir Richard Evans of failing to acknowledge the debt owed to the soldiers that were killed in the Great War claiming he had previously dismissed attempts to honour their sacrifice as “narrow tub-thumping jingoism”.

Sir Richard, Regius Professor of History and President of Wolfson College Cambridge, suggested the criticism stemmed from his vocal opposition to the Education Secretary’s ill-fated attempts to reform the way history is taught in schools.

Professor Evans told The Independent: “I never said that at all. I said his proposals for the National Curriculum were narrow tub-thumping jingoism and there is some relationship between that.” In his article Mr Gove claimed that the centenary of the start of the war which is being marked this year should not be seen “through the fictional prism” of Oh! What a Lovely War and Black Adder which characterised the four years of fighting which cost 16m lives and resulted in 20m wounded as a “series of catastrophic mistakes perpetrated by an out-of-touch elite”. “Even to this day there are left-wing academics all too happy to feed these myths,” he wrote.

However, Professor Evans accused Mr Gove of oversimplification. “How can you possibly claim that Britain was fighting for democracy and liberal values when the main ally was Tsarist Russia? That was a despotism that put Germany in the shade and sponsored pogroms in 1903-6.”

He said that unlike Germany where male suffrage was universal – 40 per cent of those British troops fighting in the war did not have the vote until 1918. “The Kaiser was not like Hitler, he was not a dictator. He could never make his mind up and changed his mind every five minutes. The largest political party in Germany in 1914 were the Social Democrats,” he said. “Germany was a very divided country in 1914 and becomes more so as time goes on. It is not Nazi Germany,” he added.

Professor Evans agreed with Mr Gove that the debate about the war is too much shaped by popular culture. “I think the Government has got it about right. I think the Department for Culture Media and Sport has made money available for groups and institutions to mark the war in any way they see fit. That is the right thing to do. I don’t think anyone should try and impose their political view on the public. The kind of debate we are having now is the right thing to do.”

Professor Gary Sheffield of the University of Wolverhampton, who was praised by Mr Gove for his recent study of Field Marshall Sir Douglas Haig, the Commander-in-Chief of the British Expeditionary Force whose Western Front offensives cost nearly one million British lives, said it was not a question of ideology.

“Mr Gove’s politics and mine are pretty different but the view he has put forward is right. What he was wrong about however is that there is a left-right split – there isn’t,” he said.

“The publicity that has been kicking off around the centenary has reflected the Black Adder point of view although he (Mr Gove) is wrong to single it out – it is satire not documentary.”

Professor Sheffield said mainstream historians had been revising their opinions of the conflict over the past three decades overturning the “bad war” theory which had taken hold in the 1930s.

The Karma of Untruthfulness - Volume 1 and 2 lectures were given by Rudolf Steiner in December 1916 in the throes of the political, social and military chaos of the First World War, when nationalistic passions were at their peak and few were willing to listen to the viewpoints of other nations. Steiner took on the very sensitive task of trying to reveal to the anthroposophical community the real reasons behind all of the developments which lead to the outbreak of war and the various political machinations which were bent on keeping it going. He emphasized repeatedly throughout the lectures, that his descriptions of events were not the result of any nationalistic tendencies of his own but were objective descriptions of what actually occurred behind the scenes.

He shows that what was (and still is) the common perception of the causes of the war - and of who was responsible – was completely manufactured by individuals who were members of secret societies and who had powerful influence over key political figures and over the media of the day. These same societies, largely in England and in Russia (those he cites) had been working steadily over decades to bring about the critical nationalistic tensions and precipitated the events which finally burst into the general mindless battle royal that history records as the “Great War”. Certain key figures in governments and monarchies came easily under their sway and became unwitting agents for their purposes, each believing that they were defending their country’s interests against the rising militarism of the “enemy”.

Steiner gives lengthy quotes from many important figures to illustrate the cunning and deceit that was used to pour the blood of hundreds of thousands of soldiers, sailors and airmen onto the battlefields of Europe in order to achieve what these “grey” brotherhoods regarded as the rightful goal of European culture.

The political subject matter is a departure from Steiner’s usual addresses, but he declared it as a necessity, considering the brutal cruelty and suffering of the moment. But as the lectures were given in the weeks leading up to Christmas, he also brought in a Christmas theme, and described the cultural and spiritual source of our celebration of the baby Jesus and the mid-winter birth, pointing back to an esoteric cultural practice of the 3rd millennium B.C., originating in the mystery centres of the Jutland region of what is now Denmark.

Additional illumination is given on the Chinese opium habit and the British-Chinese Opium Wars of the 19th Century, including the effect these had on incarnating souls in both the Chinese and European cultures of the 19th century.

Fall of the Spirits of Darkness- Lecture 1 The Driving Force Behind Europe's War

http://wn.rsarchive.org/Lectures/GA177/English/RSP1993/FalDar_index.ht ml_________________"Soon after the year 2000 has been written, a law will go forth from America whose purpose will be to suppress all individual thinking. This will not be the wording of the law, but it will be the intent" Rudolf Steiner: Gegenwärtiges und Vergangenes in Menschengeiste (The Present and the Past in the Human Spirit)

https://archive.org/stream/inevitablewar00delagoog#page/n8/mode/2up_________________"Soon after the year 2000 has been written, a law will go forth from America whose purpose will be to suppress all individual thinking. This will not be the wording of the law, but it will be the intent" Rudolf Steiner: Gegenwärtiges und Vergangenes in Menschengeiste (The Present and the Past in the Human Spirit)

At the outbreak of the First World War three cousins reigned over Europe's greatest powers - Tsar Nicholas II of Russia, Kaiser Wilhelm II of Germany and King George V of England. This two-part series looks at the role played by the three monarchs, and their relationships with each other, in the outbreak of war, arguing that it is far greater than historians have traditionally believed.

The first episode tells the story of the emerging divisions and rivalries between the interrelated royal houses of Europe and features the little known story of the two Danish sisters, Princess Alexandra and Princess Dagmar, who had pulled off the dynastic coup of the 19th century by marrying the heirs to both the British and Russian thrones. Following the invasion of their native Denmark by Prussia in 1864 during the Wars of German Unification, the sisters became the core of an anti-Prussian coalition that prefigured the great anti-German alliance of 1914. Their sons, King George V and Tsar Nicholas II were close friends.

1913 really was the last year of the Victorian age, of eternal empire, of the rock-solid confidence that to be born British was to win the lottery of life. It was much closer to 1813 – or even 1713 – in its political and social outlook than it is to 2013.
It’s true, there had been a naval arms race between Britain and Germany since 1889, but it was a race that ebbed and flowed. The chances of war had been much greater from 1906 to 1909, when Britain cranked up production of its Dreadnought battleships, and the Germans escalated their military hardware in response.
In the summer months of 1913, the clouds on the horizon were there, but they were tiny – certainly not big enough for anyone to predict the horrors that would begin a year later.
“On the question of war, it was a case of calling wolf – Anglo-German relations in 1913 were better than they had been for some time,” says Mark Bostridge, author of The Fateful Year: England 1914, to be published in January. “As
H G Wells said, 'A threat that goes on too long ceases to be much of a threat.’ Many people in 1913 thought that Germany was Britain’s natural enemy, but you’d have been hard pressed to find someone who would have confidently predicted that war was such a short time away.”
Relations with our European neighbours were warm, not least because many of their leaders were the King’s relations. In May 1913, George V, Kaiser Wilhelm II and Tsar Nicholas II – all cousins with a fairly strong resemblance to each other – met in Berlin for the jolly family wedding of the Kaiser’s daughter. A newspaper headline about the wedding read: “Guests who rule a third of the world.”
The Russian royal family were, in 1913, even more popular than ours. In March, the Romanovs celebrated 300 years on the throne, leading to a peak in monarchist sentiment. Only four years later, they were toppled in the Russian Revolution; the following year, the tsar and his family were executed in a cellar in Yekaterinburg.
“No one believed the royal wedding would be the last time the three cousins would ever meet,” says Charles Emmerson, author of 1913 – The World before the Great War. “European diplomacy was tested by the Balkan wars but the Great Powers held back. Britain and Germany cooperated to prevent a wider escalation. War was certainly not inevitable in 1913, or at least not the global, horrifically destructive war which started the following year. What we would call 'globalisation’ continued on its merry course, welding economies and peoples closer together. Another year, another war scare, but the European peace held. The moment of maximum danger passed. Why think that the following year would be any different?”...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/history/10218997/Storm-clouds-seemed-so-far -away-in-the-summer-of-1913.html_________________www.lawyerscommitteefor9-11inquiry.orgwww.rethink911.orgwww.patriotsquestion911.comwww.actorsandartistsfor911truth.orgwww.mediafor911truth.orgwww.pilotsfor911truth.orgwww.mp911truth.orgwww.ae911truth.orgwww.rl911truth.orgwww.stj911.orgwww.v911t.orgwww.thisweek.org.ukwww.abolishwar.org.ukwww.elementary.org.ukwww.radio4all.net/index.php/contributor/2149http://utangente.free.fr/2003/media2003.pdf
"The maintenance of secrets acts like a psychic poison which alienates the possessor from the community" Carl Jung
https://37.220.108.147/members/www.bilderberg.org/phpBB2/

1913 really was the last year of the Victorian age, of eternal empire, of the rock-solid confidence that to be born British was to win the lottery of life. It was much closer to 1813 – or even 1713 – in its political and social outlook than it is to 2013.
It’s true, there had been a naval arms race between Britain and Germany since 1889, but it was a race that ebbed and flowed. The chances of war had been much greater from 1906 to 1909, when Britain cranked up production of its Dreadnought battleships, and the Germans escalated their military hardware in response.
In the summer months of 1913, the clouds on the horizon were there, but they were tiny – certainly not big enough for anyone to predict the horrors that would begin a year later.
“On the question of war, it was a case of calling wolf – Anglo-German relations in 1913 were better than they had been for some time,” says Mark Bostridge, author of The Fateful Year: England 1914, to be published in January. “As
H G Wells said, 'A threat that goes on too long ceases to be much of a threat.’ Many people in 1913 thought that Germany was Britain’s natural enemy, but you’d have been hard pressed to find someone who would have confidently predicted that war was such a short time away.”
Relations with our European neighbours were warm, not least because many of their leaders were the King’s relations. In May 1913, George V, Kaiser Wilhelm II and Tsar Nicholas II – all cousins with a fairly strong resemblance to each other – met in Berlin for the jolly family wedding of the Kaiser’s daughter. A newspaper headline about the wedding read: “Guests who rule a third of the world.”
The Russian royal family were, in 1913, even more popular than ours. In March, the Romanovs celebrated 300 years on the throne, leading to a peak in monarchist sentiment. Only four years later, they were toppled in the Russian Revolution; the following year, the tsar and his family were executed in a cellar in Yekaterinburg.
“No one believed the royal wedding would be the last time the three cousins would ever meet,” says Charles Emmerson, author of 1913 – The World before the Great War. “European diplomacy was tested by the Balkan wars but the Great Powers held back. Britain and Germany cooperated to prevent a wider escalation. War was certainly not inevitable in 1913, or at least not the global, horrifically destructive war which started the following year. What we would call 'globalisation’ continued on its merry course, welding economies and peoples closer together. Another year, another war scare, but the European peace held. The moment of maximum danger passed. Why think that the following year would be any different?”...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/history/10218997/Storm-clouds-seemed-so-far -away-in-the-summer-of-1913.html_________________www.lawyerscommitteefor9-11inquiry.orgwww.rethink911.orgwww.patriotsquestion911.comwww.actorsandartistsfor911truth.orgwww.mediafor911truth.orgwww.pilotsfor911truth.orgwww.mp911truth.orgwww.ae911truth.orgwww.rl911truth.orgwww.stj911.orgwww.v911t.orgwww.thisweek.org.ukwww.abolishwar.org.ukwww.elementary.org.ukwww.radio4all.net/index.php/contributor/2149http://utangente.free.fr/2003/media2003.pdf
"The maintenance of secrets acts like a psychic poison which alienates the possessor from the community" Carl Jung
https://37.220.108.147/members/www.bilderberg.org/phpBB2/

YES, I’m fightin’ for old England
And for eighteenpence a day,
And I’m fightin’ like an ‘ero,
So the daily papers say.
Well, I ain’t no downy chicken,
I’m a bloke past forty-three,
And I’m goin’ to tell ye honest
What old England means to me.
When I joined the British Army
I’d bin workin’ thirty years,
But I left my bloomin’ rent-book
Showin’ three months in arrears.
No, I weren’t no chronic boozer,
Nor I weren’t a lad to bet;
I worked ‘ard when I could get it,
And I weren’t afeared to sweat.
But I weren’t a tradesman proper,
And the work were oft to seek,
So the most as I could addle
Were abaht a quid a week.
And when me and Jane got married,
And we ‘ad our oldest kid,
We soon learned ‘ow many shillings
Go to make a golden quid.
For we ‘ad to keep our clubs up,
And there’s three and six for rent,
And with food and boots and clothing
It no sooner came than went.
Then when kiddies kep’ on comin’–
We reared four and buried three;

My ole woman couldn’t do it,
So we got in debt–ye see.
And we ‘ad a’eap o’ sickness
And we got struck off the club,
With our little lot o’ troubles
We just couldn’t pay the sub.
No, I won’t tell you no false’oods;
There were times I felt that queer,
That I went and did the dirty,
And I ‘ad a drop o’ beer.
Then the wife and me ‘ud quarrel,
And our ‘ome were little ‘ell,
Wiv the ‘ungry kiddies cryin’,
Till I eased up for a spell.
There were times when it were better,
And some times when it were worse,
But to take it altogether,
My old England were a curse.
It were sleepin’, sweatin’, starvin’,
Wearing boot soles for a job,
It were sucking up to foremen
What ‘ud sell ye for a bob.
It were cringin’, crawlin’, whinin’,
For the right to earn your bread,
It were schemin’, pinchin’, plannin’,
It were wishin’ ye was dead.
I’m not fightin’ for old England,
Not for this child–am I? ‘Ell!
For the sake o’ that old England
I’d not face a single shell,
Not a single bloomin’ whizzbang.
Never mind this blarsted show,
With your comrades fallin’ round ye,
Lyin’ bleedin’ in a row.
This ain’t war, it’s ruddy murder,
It’s a stinkin’ slaughter ‘ouse.

There's another gorn to glory!
Damn and blast these blinkin' 'Uns!
Where's our damn retaliation?
What's the matter wiv the guns?
If they'd only give 'em rations
Same as they keeps givin' us,
They'd soon stop their bloomin' antics —
Gawd, it makes a fellah cuss.
One by one I sees 'em goin’
All the gamest and the best,
One by one they keeps on goin’,
There's another lad gorn west.
I suppose there's no munitions.
Got to save up for a spell.
While they does their blarsted savin',
My platoon gets blowed to 'ell.
Damn these blame munition workers,
Damn them and their bloomin' strike,
Thinks it's same as Peace conditions,
They can do just as they like.
Think o' Jimmy Brown! 'E's earnin'
Easy four pun ten a week,
And 'e's struck for better money -
'E's the one as oughter speak-
Been and bought a noo pianer,
And 'is wife a noo fur coat,
Gawd, I 'opes 'is Sunday dinner
Stops and turns round in 'is throat.
'Ow'd 'e like these blarsted trenches,
'Ow'd 'e like this cussed mud,
'Ow'd 'e like 'is Sunday dinner
From a dicksee stained wiv blood,
'Ow'd 'e like to sit and eat it
Next an 'arf unburied Fritz,
Wiv a smell that turns your stummick
As ye eats a bite and spits?
Better money! Gawd Almighty!
Give us sporting charnce ov life.
I don't arsk for better money,
Gimme leave to see my wife.
She don't want no noo pianer,
All she wants is me come 'ome,
If there's no retaliation,
All I gets is kingdom come.
Better money -better money,
Gawd, it makes a fellah sick,
All they thinks abaht is money,
And they makes it too damn quick.
But it's rotten bloody money,
Oughter rob 'em of their sleep,
They're just buyin' British bodies,
Buyin' tears what women weep.
Don't I wish I 'ad 'em 'ere now,
I'd soon teach 'em what is what,
They'd soon strike for better money,
This 'ud touch 'em on the spot.
All the blokes what's on moonitions
Oughter come 'ere for a spell,
All them dudes what's profiteerin'
Oughter be out 'ere - in 'ell.
Gawd, the blighters couldn't do it,
If they damn well only knew,
But they don't - they won't believe it,
They don't think that war is true.

Geoffrey Anketell Studdert Kennedy
http://m.poemhunter.com/poem/no-retaliation/_________________--
'Suppression of truth, human spirit and the holy chord of justice never works long-term. Something the suppressors never get.' David Southwell
http://aangirfan.blogspot.comhttp://aanirfan.blogspot.com
Martin Van Creveld: Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: "Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother."
Martin Van Creveld: I'll quote Henry Kissinger: "In campaigns like this the antiterror forces lose, because they don't win, and the rebels win by not losing."

If Sainsbury’s pulled out of the crass redevelopment scheme, it would be “catastrophic … for the reputation of Sainsbury’s in the South West” On the contrary, it will be an everlasting blot on Sainsbury’s reputation if they desecrate a war memorial sports ground, established just after the First World War. This is a supermarket that has values – and if the national press ever notice the blunder the company is involved in, the reputational damage will be widespread – hypocrisy will be the least of the charges. At every anniversary event, we will remember how Sainsbury’s respected the war dead.

The MPs’ way seems to be: If you’re going to tell a lie, tell a whopper.

The four MPs shamelessly side with big business (Sainsbury’s) and property speculators (Rovers’ board of directors) and against local traders/small businesses and the put upon residents of BS7. An election is coming, but so are the centenary years of the Great War. The MPs’ foolish, error-ridden letter is anti-Bristol, utterly disrespectful to the sacrifice of the Bristolian soldier sportsmen and a grave misjudgement.

The same is happening to my old school playing fields which are a memorial ground to the poet Wilfred Owen and his fallen comrades. The field was sold to Tranmere Rovers FC who now want to sell them off for housing._________________JO911B.
"for we wrestle not against flesh and blood but against principalities, against powers, against rulers of the darkness of this world, against wicked spirits in high places " Eph.6 v 12

rankly speaking against Zionism in 1961: Benjamin H. Freedman speech at the Willard Hotel. Transcripts:http://www.sweetliberty.org/issues/is...
There are also opposiing arguments
http://www.redstate.com/diary/barrypo...
Some crazy people have taken over Wikipedia pages on B.H.Freedman: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk%3AB...
The Truth will stand on its own merit
by Benjamin H. Freedman
Born in 1890, he was a successful Jewish businessman in New York City. He was at one time the principal owner of the Woodbury Soap Company. He defected from the Jewish movement in 1945, and spent the remainder of his life and most of his considerable fortune, at least 2.5 million dollars, exposing the Jewish tyranny which has enveloped the USA.

Freedman had been an insider at the highest levels of Jewish organizations involved in gaining power in the USA. Mr. Freedman was personally acquainted with Bernard Baruch, Samuel Untermyer, Woodrow Wilson, Franklin Roosevelt, Joseph Kennedy, and John F. Kennedy, and many more movers and shakers of our times.

The current and fourth Lord Rothschild has described the Balfour Declaration that helped pave the way for the creation of Israel as a “miracle” and revealed new details about his cousin Dorothea’s crucial role.

Speaking ahead of the 67-word letter’s centenary, they are his first ever public comments on the show of support from then-foreign secretary Lord Balfour to the second Lord Rothschild, his eccentric uncle Walter, and were made in a rare TV interview with former Israeli ambassador Daniel Taub as part of the Balfour 100 project.

Jacob Rothschild, 80, head of the family’s banking dynasty, said the declaration of support for a Jewish homeland in Palestine went through five drafts before finally being penned on 2 November 1917, adding: “It was the greatest event in Jewish life for thousands of years, a miracle… It took 3,000 years to get to this.”

The way it was achieved was extraordinary, he said. “It was the most incredible piece of opportunism. You had an impoverished would-be scientist, Chaim Weizmann, who somehow gets to England, meets a few people, including members of my family, seduces them, he has such charm and conviction, he gets to Balfour, and unbelievably, he persuades Lord Balfour, and Lloyd George, the prime minister, and most of the ministers, that this idea of a national home for Jews should be allowed to take place. I mean it’s so, so unlikely.”

The letter “changed the course of history for the Middle East and the Jewish people,” said Taub, who interviewed Rothschild at Waddeston Manor in Buckinghamshire, a country pile bequeathed to the nation by the family in 1957, where the Declaration is kept.

It was written to Walter Rothschild, a naturalist and collector, who was first and foremost interested in ornithology (the study of birds), said Jacob, and a “deeply eccentric man who rode around Tring Park on giant tortoises and whose carriage was pulled by zebras.

Walter only became interested in Zionism in later life, but Rothschild said he had been “deeply committed to Israel since the 1960s and have been there every year since”.

However, he said his family at the time was divided on the idea of Israel, noting that some members “didn’t think it was a good thing that this national home be established there”.

He also revealed for the first time the role of his cousin Dorothy de Rothschild, who acted as a critical go-between while still in her teens. Describing her as “devoted to Israel,” Rothschild said: “What she did, which was crucially important, was to connect Weizmann to the British establishment, and extraordinarily, she told Weizmann how to integrate, how to insert himself into British establishment life, which he learned very quickly.”

Her letters, which are stored at Waddeston, detail her later dealings with a range of Zionist leaders, and her advice on the organisation of the Zionist Conference, and Rothschild said she had a profound effect on him, introducing him to Israel and the family’s philanthropic foundation in 1962.

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot vote in polls in this forumYou cannot attach files in this forumYou can download files in this forum